Contrast-enhanced echocardiography recognized more myocardial segments (99.53% vs 84.72%) and yielded a higher absolute global longitudinal strain (-26.79% vs -21.74%) compared to 2D-STE.
Cross-Sectional (n=160)
No
Does contrast-enhanced echocardiography with speckle-tracking improve segment recognition and alter GLS measurements compared to standard 2D-STE in breast cancer patients?
Contrast-enhanced echocardiography improves endocardial segment recognition and yields higher absolute GLS values compared to standard 2D echocardiography in breast cancer patients, offering a complementary method for those with poor image quality.
Absolute Event Rate: -26.79% vs -21.74%
p-value: p=0.001
BACKGROUND: Left ventricular global longitudinal strain (GLS) obtained from two-dimensional speckle-tracking echocardiography (2D-STE) can reflect cancer therapy-related cardiac dysfunction in breast cancer (BC) patients, however, the accuracy and reproducibility of 2D-STE are restricted due to poor image quality. METHODS: Between January 2019 and October 2021, 160 consecutive BC patients aged ≥ 18 years were recruited. The 160 BC patients (mean age: 48.41 ± 9.93 years, 100% women) underwent both 2D-STE and Contrast-enhanced echocardiography (CEcho), 125 of whom were included in the measurement of GLS. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to determine the intra- and inter-observer reproducibility of 2D-STE and CEcho-STE. Correlation (r) was calculated using Pearson correlation. Statistical significance was set at P < 0.05. RESULTS: Among 160 BC patients, more segments were recognized by CEcho-STE than by 2D-STE (2,771, 99.53% vs. 2,440, 84.72%). The left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) obtained by 2D was lower than CEcho (61.75 ± 6.59% vs. 64.14 ± 5.97%, P < 0.0001). The GLS obtained by 2D-STE was lower than CEcho-STE (-21.74 ± 2.77% vs. -26.79 ± 4.30%, P = 0.001). The ICC of the intraobserver and interobserver agreements in the CEcho-STE group was lower than that in the 2D-STE group. GLS measurements were in good agreement between the 2D-STE and CEcho-STE groups (r = 0.773). CONCLUSIONS: CEcho can overcome some imaging limitations and recognize more segments than 2D, which may provide an LVEF and GLS closer to the true value. Based on AutoStrain, CEcho-STE may serve as a complementary method for those with poor image quality.
Liang et al. (Thu,) conducted a cross-sectional in Breast cancer (n=160). Contrast-enhanced echocardiography speckle-tracking echocardiography (CEcho-STE) vs. Two-dimensional speckle-tracking echocardiography (2D-STE) was evaluated on Global longitudinal strain (GLS) (p=0.001). Contrast-enhanced echocardiography recognized more myocardial segments (99.53% vs 84.72%) and yielded a higher absolute global longitudinal strain (-26.79% vs -21.74%) compared to 2D-STE.